Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SAN performance mystery

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: John Vincent <pgsql-performance(at)lusis(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery
Date: 2006-06-19 15:04:25
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
* John Vincent (pgsql-performance(at)lusis(dot)org) wrote:
> >> I'd have to agree with you about the specific SAN/setup you're working
> >> with there.  I certainly disagree that it's a general property of SAN's
> >> though.  We've got a DS4300 with FC controllers and drives, hosts are
> >> generally dual-controller load-balanced and it works quite decently.
> >>
> >How are you guys doing the load balancing? IIRC, the RDAC driver only does
> >failover. Or are you using the OS level multipathing instead? While we were
> >on the 4300 for our AIX boxes, we just created two big RAID5 LUNs and
> >assigned one to each controller. With 2 HBAs and LVM stripping that was
> >about the best we could get in terms of load balancing.

We're using the OS-level multipathing.  I tend to prefer using things
like multipath over specific-driver options.  I havn't spent a huge
amount of effort profiling the SAN, honestly, but it's definitely faster
than the direct-attached hardware-RAID5 SCSI system we used to use (from
nStor), though that could have been because they were smaller, slower,
regular SCSI disks (not FC).

A simple bonnie++ run on one of the systems on the SAN gave me this:
Version  1.03       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
                    -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Machine        Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP  /sec %CP
vardamir     32200M           40205  15 22399   5           102572  10 288.4   0
                    ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
                    -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
              files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
                 16  2802  99 +++++ +++ +++++ +++  2600  99 +++++ +++ 10205 100

So, 40MB/s out, 102MB/s in, or so.  This was on an ext3 filesystem.
Underneath that array it's a 3-disk RAID5 of 300GB 10k RPM FC disks.
We also have a snapshot on that array, but it was disabled at the time.

> >Indeed, the EMC SANs are generally the high-priced ones too, so not
> >> really sure what to tell you about the poor performance you're seeing
> >> out of it.  Your IT folks and/or your EMC rep. should be able to resolve
> >> that, really...
> >
> >
> >The only exception I've heard to this is the Clarion AX150. We looked at
> >one and we were warned off of it by some EMC gearheads.

Yeah, the Clarion is the EMC "cheap" line, and I think the AX150 was the
extra-cheap one which Dell rebranded and sold.



In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2006-06-19 23:16:35
Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery
Previous:From: John VincentDate: 2006-06-19 12:59:48
Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group